RIVERSIDE, Calif. - A federal jury has awarded Mattel Inc. $40 million in damages in a federal copyright lawsuit that pitted the house of Barbie against MGA Entertainment Inc., the maker of the saucy Bratz dolls.

Damages were awarded for contract interference and copyright infringement. No punitive damages were ordered against MGA.

The same jury that decided the damages phase concluded last month that Bratz designer Carter Bryant came up with the Bratz concept while working at Mattel.

5:44 pm August 26, 2008

ShortMattel wrote:

Desperate company, desperate measures...failure! As Spoon put it "you got no fear of the underdog, thats why you will not survive!" Sorry Barbie...

5:45 pm August 26, 2008

AP vs Reuters LOL wrote:

Hey either way it's pocket change compared to what Mudttel wanted :) Those Matty Lawyers better starting running now Babs is firing up the pink corvette to chase them down LOL
I knew this would all work out.
MGA offered 30 mill for whatever Carter's mistakes and influence on the line might have been, so MGA has to get out the change purse...

LOSER: Mattel = -$200 M (legal) + $40 M (damages) = -$160 M>>add the market cap that they will lose tomorrow and Barbie may have just shed her first tear

5:56 pm August 26, 2008

BA wrote:

Wow, after getting smacked around for a bit, Nolan pulls out what amounts to a huge victory for his client. I've worked with him before, and that's guy's a freakin' good lawyer.

6:11 pm August 26, 2008

Babs wrote:

I can't cry!! I had my tear ducts removed because they made me look old!!! Its Quinn huntin' season, me and my daddy Mattel ARE NOT HAPPY!

6:12 pm August 26, 2008

Barbie wrote:

Now I shall have to move out of my Crystal Palace and into a van down by the river. Competition is NO FAIR! I want a monopoly! I want to be the only fashion doll on the market! Why should I, Barbie, have to compete in the marketplace? You're all being mean to me!! Wah! Wah! Wah!

6:13 pm August 26, 2008

The Bratz wrote:

LOLOLOL!!!!!!!

6:28 pm August 26, 2008

joe shooshani wrote:

It feels good that justice prevails in this country, even though, I think 100 million dollar is not a small change but at least the jury did not destroy the hard work, creativity of the Bratz creator. I think we should respect and encourage people like him to come up with new ideas and don’t let our justice system to be a tool for destroying competition.

6:40 pm August 26, 2008

JQ is overrated wrote:

Nolan and Kennedy are the real deal.

6:48 pm August 26, 2008

Are they cute? wrote:

Mattel's lawyers are so full of themselves. I hope for Mattel's sake they are attractive because who wants ugly heads mounted in the conference/trophy room.

Barbie should come out with a Salome doll now with a head on the plate that resembles John Quinn. Talk about a woman scorned wait til you see a Plastic Woman scorned :)

7:04 pm August 26, 2008

Zack wrote:

Looks like the Riverside jury made a decision
here's a clip from the local news

I'm guess that Quinn is doing this case on a contingency. Their cut of $100 mil is still pretty nice (especially Quinn's personal cut).

8:16 pm August 26, 2008

A Brunette wrote:

Mattel's "award" probably doesn't even cover its legal fees!

The irony is -- Mattel could have come out on top if it spent all the money that it put on lawyers on product development instead.

8:51 pm August 26, 2008

Anon wrote:

Riverside juries are notoriously stingy. I wonder who made the decision to bring the case there.

8:59 pm August 26, 2008

HAPPY wrote:

JUSTISE DOES PREVAIL,SORRY MATTLE MAYBE YOU DID TO FIND ANOTHER WAY TO MAKE UP YOUR LOSSES INSTEAD OF HIGHJACKING OTHER COMPANYS IDEAS! CONGRADULATIONS ISAAC,PAULA AND MGA! :)

9:42 pm August 26, 2008

neighbor wrote:

Based on Mattel's financial statements and comments to analysts, it was going out of pocket on legal fees against MCA.

9:47 pm August 26, 2008

Great White Hunter wrote:

Update at 7:34 p.m. ET: AP has corrected its earlier report stating that a federal jury awarded Mattel $40 million in a case of copyright infringement and contract interference against the maker of the Bratz dolls, MGA Entertainment. AP, following reports from Reuters and other news outlets, now puts the award at $100 million. No explanation yet for the error.

11:09 pm August 26, 2008

vlad wrote:

Wow, if the fee numbers are correct, those lawyers really did well. I must have missed those law school courses on how to rape and pillage the client.

11:31 pm August 26, 2008

Love Barbie wrote:

David and Goliath, I just love that story.

11:38 pm August 26, 2008

The worst Bratz fan you've ever heard of wrote:

After reading Mattel's arguments in its case against MGA Entertainment, I believe Mattel and its attorney John Quinn should win an award for "Best Comedy Performance." This company has never delivered anything nearly as funny in years. No, wait, it actually is funny, to see Mattel so desperate to do anything and everything it possibly can to vanquish any competition that it believes is a threat to its business.

In fact, this afternoon, Mattel had a hand in sabotaging the news and media regarding the amount of damages the jury awarded it. And, as a result of its efforts, Mattel actually made people laugh: The jury awarded Mattel $20 million in damages, not $100 million. Now that's comedy at its finest. Congratulations to Mattel for a job well done. :-)

12:45 am August 27, 2008

Legal Beagle wrote:

Wow! I didn't call this one...but you just had to know that Mattel was never going to get really big $ amounts in the damages it was seeking.

1:58 am August 27, 2008

James wrote:

MGA Corrects Media Reports: Mattel is Awarded $20 Million in Damages, Not $100 Million as Reported

MGA Corrects Media Reports: Mattel is Awarded $20 Million in Damages, Not $100 Million as Reported

Los Angeles, CA –August 26, 2008 – In light of the verdict in MGA Entertainment’s
trial against Mattel, MGA today said that certain media reports regarding the damages
awarded in the trial are inaccurate.

The jury awarded $20 million to Mattel in damages. Some media reports have incorrectly reported that Mattel was awarded $100 million.

MGA said that the jury made its award pursuant to a variety of legal claims, each based on the same damages theory, and subject to the Court's instruction not to be concerned about duplicative damages. MGA pointed out that during the trial Mattel even conceded that the damages it sought were overlapping and duplicative.

MGA further stated that it intends to appeal any amount of awarded damages at the end
of the case.

“We are pleased to have this trial behind us,” said Isaac Larian, CEO of MGA
Entertainment. “We can now concentrate all of our energies on what we do best -
providing dolls and other toys that are the consumers’ first choice.”

It's hard to win trade secret type lawsuits unless clear smoking gun theft is involved. And perhaps Mattell was simply trying to get MGA to burn some cash on lawyers fees, so in that sense the suit succeeded.

7:36 am August 27, 2008

Stoopid wrote:

What Guest said is...silly. Consider the profits Mattel itself identified as coming to MGA, north of a BILLION dollars. Any legal fees burned up by this litigation are rounding error compared to that. Mattel faced similar fees. The difficulty with many of the IP litigations I've worked on is that both sides lose the fees and sometimes get distracted from day-to-day business operations -- sometimes third parties can use this to their advantage.

It is fascinating to see all of these right wingers desperately wrangling over $100 million here and $100 million there. Reputation and profits have somehow become more important than lives and body parts lost in personal injury cases. Responsbility matters when it is a trade secret, but not when it involves reckless drivers and dangerous drugs. Great lawyers give their clients good advice about possible verdicts and tailor their strategy, attorney fees and costs accordingly. I guess Mattel did not have very good lawyers.

10:05 am August 27, 2008

KS Trial Lawyer wrote:

Mr. or Ms. Frivolous,

How is it that you brand these business litigation lawyers (plaintiff's and defendat's) as "right wingers"? The presently touted "tort reform" is not wise. But I can't agree with your comparison of the types of cases.

11:12 am August 27, 2008

FromTheWings wrote:

So much of the Quinn Emmanuel franchise has been built on hype. This blowout ought to provide some perspective. Even if Mattel ends up with $100-milion, and it looks like it may get a whole lot less, this lawsuit was a monumental failure for Mattel.

11:59 am August 27, 2008

Denver Lady Lawyer wrote:

This cracks me up. I have some idea -- on a minuscule scale -- of the joy those MGA attorneys are feeling today. I once defended a 3-day arbitration against a totally shameless pit-bull plaintiff's attorney, in what should have been a simple breach of contract case. We offered to settle on the eve of hearing for $150K (costs of arbitration); his client insisted he wanted $1.5 million; damages ultimately awarded were $10K. Stupid lawyer's take didn't even cover his paralegal's time to make exhibit notebooks. I would guess that Q&E was planning on a much, MUCH bigger haul in this one.

1:17 pm August 27, 2008

Anonymous wrote:

hey hey it's mga

1:23 pm August 27, 2008

Coby wrote:

It's time to throw Barbie a retirement party!

1:42 pm August 27, 2008

LOL wrote:

The Flip Flop Lawyers have FLOPPED

2:03 pm August 27, 2008

BRATZ wrote:

CONGRATULATIONS MGA, ISAAC THE BEST CEO, NEVER GIVING UP, TO PAULA AND HER AMAZING BRATZ TEAM, THANK YOU FOR FIGHTING FOR YOUR DREAM AND NEVER GIVING UP. YOU GUYS ROCK!!!!!!!!!!!

2:40 pm August 27, 2008

BRATZ wrote:

CONGRATULATIONS MGA,YOU ROCK!!!!!

3:56 pm August 27, 2008

joe wrote:

i can;t believe this happened - MGA are thiefs and should have paid wayyyyyy more

4:05 pm August 27, 2008

Anonymous wrote:

"Hey, Joe,
Where you gonna run to now?
Where you gonna run to?
Hey, Joe, I said,
Where you gonna run to now?
Where you . . . where you gonna go?"

"Well, dig,
I'm goin' way down south,
Way down to Mexico way.
Alright!
I'm goin' way down south,
Way down where I can be free.
Ain't no one gonna find me.
Ain't no hangman gonna,
He ain't gonna put a rope around me
You better believe it right now! I gotta go now."

"Hey, hey Joe,
You better run on down...

Run Joe were coming for you.

4:08 pm August 27, 2008

BRATZ wrote:

JOE GET OVER IT! "THE TRUTH ALWAYS WIN" MGA ROCKS, THE BRATZ ROCK! TIME FOR MATTLE EMPLOYEES TO TRY EARNING YOUR OWN WAY! CONGRATULATIONS MGA!!!!!!!!

4:32 pm August 27, 2008

Anon2 wrote:

No mind. This will appear on the Quinn website as a complete victory, padding their 92% victory stats.

4:50 pm August 27, 2008

HEY HEY wrote:

IT'S MGA

9:13 pm August 27, 2008

Mattel and Quinn wrote:

""Regardless of the final amount set by the court, we are pleased that the principles of fair play and fair competition that prompted Mattel to bring suit in the first place have prevailed," said Mattel's chief executive, Bob Eckert.

"Mattel has pursued this case first and foremost as a matter of principle. We have an obligation to defend ourselves against competitors who choose to engage in fraudulent activities against us. We're pleased that the jury agreed with Mattel that what MGA did was wrong."

LOLOL Keep saying that over and over again until you believe it. YOU LOST, you had an artist who messed up- to you that's "luck" looks like you dumped your money into a a huge joke. You wanted to destroy the competiton you care nothing about morals you are the worst company, you lie stalk cheat and steal and your try at stamping out another doll line failed that is what it was about from DAY ONE.
YOU LOSE.

9:54 pm August 27, 2008

Judge Wapner wrote:

Just saw an ad on TV where Larry H.Parker claims a 91% success rate -- so 92% for attys making $750~$1000 per hour doesn't seem all that great!

9:57 pm August 27, 2008

To Anonymous wrote:

Was that "Hey Joe" version the one by Arthur Lee and Love, the Leaves, or Hendrix? When I sing along, I want to make sure I have the correct version.

10:18 pm August 27, 2008

Marcus wrote:

F@ck Mattel. They are the BIGGEST THIEVES in the entire business world. I just read an article at businesswire.com and learned that Carter Bryant’s salary for about two weeks at Mattel was a measly $2,000. Now, Mattel is asking the jury to award them damages from Isaac Larian in excess of $700 million? Who’s the damn thief now. I didn’t know this until today. I am really pissed!! I hope Mattel shareholders dump Mattel’s collapsing stock and invest elsewhere. If you want to read about the article, go to http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080826005518&newsLang=en

10:26 pm August 27, 2008

Marcus wrote:

I agree with Coby.

It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!
It’s time to throw Barbie a retirement party!

10:36 pm August 27, 2008

Marcus wrote:

Mattel is nothing but BANK ROBBERS. I truly hope MGA & Larian do end up throwing Barbie a retirement party either in Las Vegas or Hollywood. LET’S GET THE PARTY STARTED!

10:55 pm August 27, 2008

Anonymous wrote:

If you want to express your anger at Mattel, you can write to or call the following:
Mattel Inc.
333 Continental Blvd.
El Segundo, CA 90245-5012
United States
Phone: 310-252-2000
Fax: 310-252-2179

About Law Blog

The Law Blog covers the legal arena’s hot cases, emerging trends and big personalities. It’s brought to you by lead writer Jacob Gershman with contributions from across The Wall Street Journal’s staff. Jacob comes here after more than half a decade covering the bare-knuckle politics of New York State. His inside-the-room reporting left him steeped in legal and regulatory issues that continue to grab headlines.

Must Reads

Plaintiffs' lawyers dodged a bullet last year when the U.S. Supreme Court spared a quarter-century-old precedent that had served as the legal linchpin of the modern investor class-action case. Despite that win, a new report suggests that securities class actions have lost some of their firepower.

In a week in which images of Prophet Muhammad were connected to acts of terror and defiant expressions of freedom, a sculpture of the prophet of Islam inside the U.S. Supreme Court has drawn little notice.

The salacious allegations against Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz that surfaced in a federal lawsuit involving convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have generated international attention. Drawing less coverage is the lawsuit itself -- a case with the potential to expand the rights of crime victims during federal investigations.